On Saturday, I participated in Orlando’s Barcamp, dev-day. I spoke early in the day, and I knew from listening to others who talked about the previous Barcamp that my topic would be unusual. Here’s the gist of my talk:

The title is from the philosopher Hippocrates, who lived in Greece, around 400BCE. He was observing that life is brief compared to what we can make and do. How do we know Hippocrates said these words? We have records from that time.

400BCE is relatively young, as “ancient civilizations” go. I gave examples of other civilizations, spanning back to the oldest, of Sumer, 8000 years ago. We know a lot of the Sumerians, and we know a lot of most every literate ancient civilization, but not a lot about one specific civilization. The Egyptian empire lasted from 3100BCE to 50BCE, and though we know a lot about the civilizations before it and the ones after it — we know very little of Egypt. All because of something the Egyptians invented: Paper.

Egyptians put their art on stone, which lasts even until now. They wrote their information on their new technology, which didn’t last more than a generation or so. The civilization that made the African pyramids are much more of a mystery to us than they should be. That’s the cautionary tale, and we should worry about how we are in the same danger.

What will the people of a thousand years from now know of us? Will we be the group that consumed a huge fraction of resources, poisoned the environment, and left behind only a mystery about who, how, why? How long will information about you and me last? 10,000 years? 1000? 100? Even 50? Does that 50 sound preposterous?

Consider: We, in the 21st century are in a much worse predicament than the Egyptians were. We store a large portion of our data on something that is so ephemeral that we’re usually startled to find a device still operational after 10 years. In 2002, we created 5 exabytes of new information. For too much of it, we have no real control over how it’s stored, either because it’s too massive or often because it’s beyond our reach.

Contrast what a budding biographer of now and 80 years in the future would do to publish her grandfather’s letters from war? A child of today would dig up dusty letters out of an attic, but the child of the future will have to ask Yahoo for copies of archived e-mail. Can you imagine what they’re likely to say? “404!”

So, what can we do?

I propose and dismiss “Hope for the Singularity to save it.” Also, “stop making so much.”

Two ideas that may have merit are: Label our data with how unique and important it is likely to be. Make our own version of stone tablets.

Neither of these are particularly hard problems. All we have to do is put a little effort into it, and we’d have a solution to 90% of the problem. This the fun part, and I’ll leave most of it for you, dear reader to think about.

Here are a few of my ideas: 3-D printing of information bricks. Quaternary bits of DNA, in some durable container. Knots are an encoding of a series of hand movements.

06 Apr 2008, 21:37 #

“Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing…after they have exhausted all other possibilities.” — Winston Churchill

Today, the remaining states finalize their intra-party choices for the Presidential candidacy. We Floridians do not vote today, so there’s probably not a lot that this message could do, but I think I should say it loudly because I’m unusually happy with what I have to say:

If B. Obama is an option on my ballot in November, then I’m voting for him.

I’m usually sick at the idea of making a choice for the high office. No one is good enough. I’ve tried voting for the principled underdog. I’ve tried voting against the evil popular bastard. I’ve cursed the polling ruleset that forced terrible choices upon me.

Finally, with Barack Obama, I’m happy with someone who also happens to be popular.

I’m sad that it took a backlash against jingos to get here. I’m sad that it took weariness of two counterproductive wars to waken us. I’m sad that it took scrapping parts of our fundamental founding documents, like habeas corpus and the first and fourth Amendments. I’m sad that, to frighten us, it took crippling our economy and borrowing many trillions of dollars of money that we can’t pay back in our lifetime. I’m sad that it took looking like gullable morons to the rest of the world for years to embarrass us enough. And more. Much more. I’m sad that we had to burn ourselves on the stove again and again and again and again in order to learn not to touch it. (Though some still haven’t learned. Some never learn.) I’m so sad about the cost we had to pay to finally come to push someone worthwhile onto the stage.

The watchword of this election is “change.” Every candidate claims to want change. (Even if some want the change to be to hold their hands on the stove even longer next time.) I’m weary of the corrupt and the idiotic. I want someone who is moral and smart with whom I may not always agree, over the legion of corrupt puppets who know how to polarize the electorate. The only credible agent of change for the better that I can see is Barack Obama.

Decide for yourself. See:

Obama’s 2004 DNC keynote speech. Part one. Part two.

My hero, L Lessig, details why Obama is his choice and recommendation.

A music video that plays to our emotions more than to intellect, but is still pretty good.

---

Old post: 2008 US Presidency Outlook .

05 Feb 2008, 16:00 #

At our Heidelberg dev-meeting a few months ago, Mårten announced that the entire company would meet in mid-January in my town, Orlando, Florida. I was blinded by the thought of coming to the City of Cement and Glitter, after meetings in beautiful places all over the world, like Budapest, Malta, Sorrento, Stockholm, Cancún, Seattle, Helsinki, Budapest, New York — and then coming to where I live. Ugh. How embarassed would I be?

Well once I recovered and gave it thought, I was certain that there would be an announcement of IPO at the meeting. MySQL has been preparing for publicly offering stock for a while. It made so much sense.

Today, the third day of the meeting (for me), I was late to the start. I walked in and it took me 15 full minutes to realize that right then was The Big Event, and it was not what I was expecting.

Instead, Sun Microsystems (ticker JAVA, née SUNW) decided to pay one billion dollars for MySQL. I am shocked and dizzy.

It might not be a complete disaster. Sun has behaved lately like it understands Free software: See GPL Java and OpenSolaris . They seem to understand working at home. They seem to like what MySQL employees are doing. I am cautiously optimistic.

So, I’ll have a “sun.com” email address soon. I don’t know if I’ll have to give up chad at mysql dot com. I hope not. I’ll get new business cards. I’ll get access to lots of good hardware.

Maybe it’s not awful. We’ll see.

16 Jan 2008, 22:37 #

Our vacation was fantastic. I loved Heidelberg and what I saw of Munich. Ireland wasn’t as great, but had its charm.

But, in our plans to move, money is a big factor. As it is, we can’t afford to live there.

I expect to be paid in US dollars by the “Inc.” company. (I could perhaps move to a European corporation, but that raises other tax-related problems. “Inc.” exists to avoid those, actually.) But, the dollar is tanking. Today, one US dollar trades at less than 0.70 euro. Or, 1 EUR = 1.41US$. That was 1:1 when the euro was introduced, a few years ago.

Compounded on that, Ireland is expensive. If we were moving to Germany, the dollar:euro ratio may be tolerable, but Ireland is expensive even by European standards.

So, our plans to move in three months are postponed, perhaps indefinitely. Sad, sad, sad.

06 Oct 2007, 15:45 #

It’s kind of strange, but as a free-software programmer, I work in the world of copyright. Instead of selling wafers of plastic that happen to have instructions embedded in them, I rely on copyright to make sure that what comes out of the tapping of my keyboard is used in ways that I want. I give away the source code to be used all alike by Fortune 100 companies and basement hackers and school kids in the heart of Africa, but everything I write is copyrighted.

Property rights are pretty obvious and are as such well understood in most places. If you grow a pear tree, the tree and its fruit are yours. Property rights exist only in the context of other people; it makes no sense to assert rights if you’re the only person on a desert island. Property is a societal contract that attempts to keep use of something in the hands of the one who fabricated it. We may trade it for time or we may shift it in and out of symbols like money, but the use and value is still (for the most part) preserved.

But, what about ideas? If I invent a recipe for pear pies and teach you how to make them, I lose nothing (except exclusivity). There’s (almost) no cost to sharing an idea. Free flow of ideas immeasurably helps our tribes grow.

The US’s patent system and its copyright system are separate, but similar. In the patent system, society makes the deal that if an inventor creates something new, then in exchange for detailing it in public form, society will guarantee exclusive usage of it for some limited number of years. After the term expires, anyone at all may take the details and use them. Ownership of that idea falls from the domain of the inventor into the domain of the public. Copyright is similar. A writer gets exclusive ownership over the contents of the work for some number of years. These terms are supposed to be incentive for creators to produce new work.

Section 8 of first Article of the US Constitution says what congress has the power to do:

… To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

It’s because of this that we can print the complete writings of Thomas Paine, and put on plays of William Shakespeare, and play piano concertos of Sergei Rachmaninoff — all without finding who owns them and begging for permission. Such works were guaranteed legal protection for some number of years, and then they fall into the public domain. No one owns “Macbeth”.

But, unfortunately, the words “limited time” has lately failed to mean anything. Enter stage left: Disney.

In the US, the term of copyright protection was 56 years until the 1976 Copyright Act, whereupon it was extended to the remaining lifetime of the author plus 50 years. Then, as Mickey Mouse’s copyright was due to expire in the year 2000, Disney paired with congressman Sonny Bono and passed the Copyright Term Extension Act, which makes the new terms lifetime plus 70 years (or total of 95 years for a corporation). Quoting Wikipedia,

Under this Act, additional works made in 1923 or afterwards that were still copyrighted in 1998 will not enter the public domain until 2019 or afterwards (depending on the date of the product) unless the owner of the copyright releases them into the public domain prior to that or if the copyright gets extended again.

The public domain is now effectively strangled. The tail that followed us in time, marking where works become usable by all of us, suddenly grew much longer. Those works, that could go into the public domain and serve as inspiration and fertiliser for new works, are now locked up for even more time. Managers of estates of long-dead creators are the major lobbyists to keep the public domain from growing. Mary Bono, spoke about her husband after his death:

Actually, Sonny wanted the term of copyright protection to last forever. I am informed by [Congressional staff] that such a change would violate the Constitution. … As you know, there is also [Motion Picture Association of America president] Jack Valenti’s proposal for term to last forever less one day. Perhaps the Committee may look at that next Congress.

This is especially shameful and ironic considering how much of those very same people relied on a rich and vibrant public domain. Disney, for example, didn’t invent “Cinderella” or “Snow White” — those came from the public domain. The copyright to the book “The Jungle Book” expired and Disney could then make the book into a movie.

Works of art that are woven deep in to the fabric of our lives from long ago should fall into the public domain so they can be performed, and used, and extended or rebuilt any way we like. The wellspring of the public domain feeds new arts, and we should never staunch its flow. The public domain should kept rich and replenished with works that fall out of contemporary attention and into history — if it’s not then we face the prospect of a barren landscape with no materials to use to build new art. By locking up our past, we sterilize our future.

Millions of works from the last century are integral to our lives and culture, but descendents of the authors unnaturally extend their legal control. The next time you’re in a restaurant and you hear some stupid tune instead of “Happy Birthday to You”, think long and hard about why the copyright on that song now isn’t due to expire until the year 2030 (and can’t be performed in public without a license). Consider that when you want to show your grandchildren or great-grandchildren “Song of the South”, even though it will be ancient by then, you probably won’t be able to. Our culture should not be locked away by people or organizations whose only virtue or claim on it is ancestoral.

10 Sep 2007, 18:28 #

Apple Computer Inc pioneered the modern computer interface. It took the ideas originally germinated at Xerox PARC and ran with them, and in doing so changed how we interact with machines. The original Finder was a marvel. The typefaces were a fantastic (something MSFT Windows still fails at). The mouse was elegant, and the designers understood UI design, including that every mouse action should have an equivalent keyboard action. The Mac was the perfect interface for blind people to use, even.

No more. Apple has gone astray. Fast, capable graphics have made it easy to create lifelike and better-than-lifelike imagery. Material sciences and computer advancement have made it easy to make the hardware look and behave almost any way one can imagine.

When Steve Jobs left Apple and started NeXT, he declared a new fashion of the exterior of computers: Beige was boring, and Black was cool.

Steve brought that ethos back to Apple when Apple acquired NeXT, and instead of black, Steve wanted computers we’d “want to lick”. Colors were suddenly vitally important. You could get a rainbow of workstations. Windows are brushed metal or transparent or hopping around.

Apple’s OS X built atop NeXTstep. The two operating systems were similar, but had some major differences in UI design. The consistency and beauty of each operating system disappeared when Apple merged them, and the resulting mongrel lacks almost all of the beauty that each independently had. OS X is quirky and annoying and unpredictable. The several GUI toolkits’ behaviors are inconsistent and confusing.

But, OS X is pretty. At any given moment, as long as you don’t have to do anything, it’s pleasant to look at. Apple’s environment is evidently designed to be passively viewed. The buttons may look like gumdrops or glistening bubbles of water, but you’re not supposed to do anything with them. The depth of Apple’s new design regime ignores your ten fingers and mousing hand, and extends only to what an idiot child might like to do with its tongue.

29 Aug 2007, 13:26 #

Some from the themes “What’s Next in Tech” and “Tales of Invention”

• Blaise Aguera y Arcas: Jaw-dropping Photosynth demo
• Jeff Han: Unveiling the genius of multi-touch interface design
• Bill Stone: Journey to the center of the Earth … and beyond!
• Jeff Hawkins: Brain science is about to fundamentally change computing

13 Aug 2007, 18:41 #

I found this great list over at bedang. By J. Vogt.

Are there more overly opinionated dumb-dumbs out there than ever? Some say yes, others say that saying “some say” means “I think”, which is correct in this case. And while I am bothered by the stupid posing as smarty pants, I have no problem with simple people in general. In fact, because I may be one, I’ll say that I often find them original and endearing. So don’t get all uppity about it, stupid.

1. You bemoan the obsession with celebrity culture, yet have opinions on a celebrity.

If you need to express that celebrity X or Y is a a piece of trash/whore/moron then you’ve already bought into the media construct. The media you rant about wants you to have an opinion. It doesn’t matter if it’s good or bad, as long as it isn’t apathy. Why are “we” so obsessed with celebrity? Because people like you think having opinions about the lives of strangers is normal. Turn away and see the light.

2. You use the word/s Nazi, Fascist or Commie to describe what you don’t like.

Hyperbole is the way that mental defectives try to get their points across. Unless you’re referring to actual adherents of National Socialism, Corporatism or Marxism, you should never use these words—including derivatives such as Feminazi. If you do, people think of you like a yappy little dog, without the cute factor and probably more smelly.

3. You’ve ever said “you have no right to judge”.

With that phrase, you’re actually inventing a right then taking it away. You have no right to take away my imaginary judging rights, fascist.

4. You moralise about the environment and eat farmed meat.

The real inconveniant truth is that eating farmed animals is the biggest way individuals contribute to heating the globe. So if you claim to be green, go veg or switch to cannibalism. Otherwise, enjoy the burgers and stop the pretence, fatty. Accept that your maladapted existence is a burden on the planet. If it keeps you up at night, reassure yourself that a meat induced heart attack may level things out anyway.

5. You’ve called a country “a nation of immigrants”.

Redundant. It either applies to all nations or none. Why? Because humans don’t grow out of the ground. Wherever they exist, either they or their ancestors moved there. Calling a nation one of immigrants does not differentiate it at all from any other nation. Unless you’re comparing it to that nation of potatoes.

6. You say something oh-so-clever, then ruin it all by suggesting it “begs the question”.

Which actually means that you just did yourself for a logical fallacy. You meant to say that it poses or raises the question. At some point in time, some hack journalist wrongly applied “begging the question” and it snowballed. Now the hordes of b-grade intelligentsia posing as clever people use the same phrase.

7. You keep reminding us that you don’t want to go back to the “dark ages”.

The “dark ages” were named as such by propagandists from following periods, usually keen to discredit any people that weren’t up for Roman world domination. Almost every stereotype that popular culture indulges in, including that people from that age believed the earth was flat, is untrue. Anyone who gets their history from books rather than Monty Python flicks knows this. By even referring to the early Middle Ages as something bad, you’re showing how well you would have fitted in there—had they been as bad, stupid and regressive as you make out.

8. You cite movies as proof of anything.

Movies are the opinions of their creators. A sure sign that you’re in the presence of a cleverist(sp) is that they will cite a movie, compare it to reality and think they’re onto something. Drama has become a point of reference for the inexperienced and easily led. Plato declared it the enemy of truth. This was back when it was staged and easily distinguishable from reality. If only he could see the plebs and their blurred worldview now, infected with the neuroses of movie creators and feeling smarter for it.

9. You describe yourself as a “creative person”.

In lieu of other people applying it to them, this is the label that non-creative people apply to themselves.

10. You say *anything, ever* with a mix of sarcasm and forced laughter.

You know what I’m talking about. That lethal combo of obvious discomfort posing as superiority. A puff of faux laughter out the nose, furrow of the brow, fake smile, shake of the head and a “yeah right”. If you haven’t done that once over the course of this list, then this list quite possibly isn’t directed at you.

10 Aug 2007, 11:31 #

Oh, I so much want to go to The Orlando BarCamp. It’s held about 2 miles away from my house, but I’ll be thousands of miles away at the time. Grr.

BarCamp takes its name from the metasyntactic variables, foo, bar, baz, quux. The original camp, FOO Camp — Friends of O’Reilly — was an invitation-only event in California and its goals sounded like a good idea. BarCamp is a spin-off that’s open and more local.

27 Jul 2007, 09:09 #

More in the themes, “To Boldly Go…” and “The Power of Cities”:

• Tierney Thys: Swim with giant sunfish in the open ocean
• Craig Venter: A voyage of DNA, genes and the sea
• Steven Johnson: A guided tour of the Ghost Map
• Majora Carter: Greening the ghetto

25 Jul 2007, 21:45 #